threshold of decision, speed of decision, false sense of accuracy

Are the core three reasons.

1) Threshold of decision - you need to tightly define and be consistent with when video assistance can be used. For football it should be confined to instant reversals of things that are blatantly missed or wrong. You could also look to having a set number of challenges for each team (like cricket and tennis)

2) Speed of decision - flip side of point 1. If it is taking multiple replays from multiple angles then it's not a clear and obvious mistake. A cut off point of 10-20 seconds would make sense.

3) False sense of accuracy - in particular in relation to the offside decisions, knowing the technology I *know* that it is not accurate enough from a technical standpoint to make judgements less than around a foot. Again, if it can be seen from the replay that someone is clearly offside, it can be overturned, if you're arguing around those lines and it's not clear from the video then I think the benefit of the doubt should go to the attacker. The frame rates of the video and the various tracking systems cannot be trusted sub 30cm.

Inconsistency and speed are ultimately what is undermining its use - which is a shame, because had they limited it's use to the originally stated objectives it would have been fine.

Posted By: Cardiff Canary, May 30, 09:22:37